|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: in less time than it takes the latest OS update to disable Windows 10
Heavens to Murgatroyd, Quickdraw! That'ths Fathst!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Having worked on an air force base and intermingled with the government workers (especially some in contracts), logic has nothing to do with this. If you did some investigation of this company, you would likely find a gay, black, female veteran with PSD and war wounds as the CEO/President with the corporate backers behind her. Not criticizing any particular class of people... just saw it happen again and again.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
How in Hell does an "economically disadvantaged" company with only nine employees win a contract with the DoD?
I smell backhanders. Or OBB.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: I smell backhanders. Or OBB.
Oh hush! The current US administration is the most honest and transparent administration in history! They would never...
Damn! I almost made it through that with a straight face.
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. ~ Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
The contract is categorized as LPTA - Lowest Price Technically Acceptable. In other words, if you bid lower than everyone else, you win. Period. The company also scores points according to its typical imaginary disadvantages, such as age, gender, sexual orientation and race of owner, the owner's veteran status, whether or not they're disabled, and the newest kid on the block, economical status.
Like someone else already stated, a gay handicapped veteran minority woman owned business will almost always fare better in the government procurement process than a more capable company with a proven track record of success in meeting contract goals that has staff on-hand.
I think there's a law/regulation that says the incoming company has to offer the incumbent employees the jobs they already have, but there is no law/regulation that says the offer has to be reasonable in terms of pay/benefits.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: The contract is categorized as LPTA - Lowest Price Technically Acceptable. In other words, if you bid lower than everyone else, you win. Period. The company also scores points according to its typical imaginary disadvantages, such as age, gender, sexual orientation and race of owner, the owner's veteran status, whether or not they're disabled, and the newest kid on the block, economical status.
Thank Heaven that there are people who make up rules like that, to help prevent tax money being wasted.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
When you try to please everybody, you end up pleasing nobody. I just wish they would realize that.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
I worked for Dept of Energy for a number of years and had to take some courses in how things are done (and warnings on things not to do).
I was called on to review sets of proposal - which had a number of criteria and they were given points by (at the time) four different people with related science backgrounds. The one with the most points got the contract - not necessarily the lowest bid.
The lowest bid goes more for items that are objective - buying a Jeep, for example.
Now, back to the evaluation procedure: at the time, I was known for being 'incorruptible' - which implies I spoke my mind. I was the odd-man-out on a contract evaluation. They had a favorite picked (HP) and I wouldn't change my vote - they tried to convince me - how they wanted unanimity so it couldn't be appealed - but I wouldn't budge. I didn't get many more tech evaluations after that.
<Annoyed interlude>
But hold on - you blamed the current administration? Such pure BS - the sleaze I described occurred during the Reagan administration. My part of the agency had over $300M to disperse and it went to fund projects in what we now term "red state". If I went on about the previous admin to the current and its corruption it, would embarrass even the Soapbox. Get off the BS-Box and accept that all the politicos and their appointees (except Fiorello LaGuardia) give out appointed positions and the appointees have their own agenda.
</Annoyed interlude>
Same with "close enough for government work" - I learned that that is the result of a court ruling (in favor of a business) and has nothing to do with Federal employee behavior. The incorrectly made items were ruled by the judge to be in "Substantial Compliance" and the Fed had to pay for them. That set a precedent.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Get off the BS-Box and accept that all the politicos and their appointees (except Fiorello LaGuardia) give out appointed positions and the appointees have their own agenda.
I didn't say anything about the current administration, but in the end, the current administration is ultimately responsible because they could very well correct the problem if they really wanted to. It's like being the captain of a ship. No matter who was actually responsible for the ship running aground, the captain is the one ultimately responsible because he's in charge.
I don't care who started it (and that is completely irrelevant). I care that it's still a problem.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
If I read what wasn't there, my apologies.
The problem about being responsible for everything, however, is intractable. In an ideal situation, an organization will need a tree of delegation of duties. As the organization increases in size - well obviously the number of branches increases and the number of leaves.
Ultimately, one relies on a chain of connections that has to make judgments as to what should be passed on and how high. If everything went to the top then it would be pointless chaos. Even one's own body has spinal reflexes so that the brain can spend more time on brain stuff.
So yes - whoever is running the current administration is ultimately responsible (a la Harry Truman) but in a practical sense, how many layers can you manage?
There's the second aspect: the administration, in practical terms, includes more than the executive branch. Look at the stalled/blocked Zika funding legislation. The money's there but the legislative majority won't remove a couple of unrelated 'poison pills' - so the disease continues to spread. Do we blame the chief executive? Do we blame the judicial? Neither of them can have a say, yet - but the crap's still flying. Like the DOE funding of proposals . . . the executive runs the agencies but the spending is voted for (and earmarked for implicitly or explicitly) by the legislative branch - of course we know this as pork.
So - sometimes you're absolutely right at where the buck stops. The US government, however, isn't a ship with a single captain in any real sense.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
No need to defend him - with GOP legislative branch unabashedly touting their desire to make sure nothing gets done in his administration - and doing their best to do nothing - I have no way to judge how he would have been as president.
For now, however, that den of thieves that care nothing for the well-being of the American people, is run by a particular party and the ruinous results of their political goose-stepping has to accept the blame.
Consider this: they're tying defending of Planned Parenthood (citing an expose that was shown to be fraudulent) because they pander to the religious right's views on how others should live their lives. So they'll let the money run out and the virus will spread. So guess what? One can and should lay squarely at their feet the abortions that result from pregnant woman who have been exposed to the Zika virus because these politicians don't care to stop the spread! And, of course, a lifetime of expensive care and rehabilitation for those that are born with microcepahly. Which expense, of course, they also wash their hands of.
I don't care to defend Obama - but I also know where the real blame lies: Bible Pounding hypocrites and their elected officials.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bush screwed up the economy with his non-enforcement of the financial regulations.
He screwed up much of the world with the lying excuse to attack Iraq.
But maybe he shouldn't be blamed - he had nothing to do with running the country.
And congress' ruling party publicly and proudly proclaimed their intent to obstruct everything. So - yeah - blaming them's pretty reasonable.
Obama's responsible (where his powers reside) in the creating of a foreign policy that is (in my opinion) screwed up. "kumbaya" just doesn't work. The rest of his mess is details resulting from not showing the will to say "Up Yours" when "Kumbaya" didn't work. One possible thing good that could come of some of this: the world should start to chip in more of the cost, in blood and treasure, for all of the policing they want done. If his policy has anything like a bit of a silver lining it would be to get the EU, Japan, &etc. to pay some of the cost of the stability from which they so richly profit.
Oh yes - his Iran deal sucks mightily - but he's in cahoots with the EU on that. A pox on the whole lot of them.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Nothing got done when the democrats control the senate either.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, in the past, things got done when either party controlled the senate. They even did this weird-ass thing called negotiation and compromise.
In this particular case, my point and anger is not that nothing was done because of deadlock during negotiations but rather a deliberate desire to (unsuccessfully) prevent Obama's re-election. It was not for the good of the nation but the good of their party that was their concern - and national woes, in the imaginings of their broken minds, played into their hands.
A minority subset of the republican party hijacked the party and attempted to hijack the entire government - and with Koch brothers money, they got halfway there.
There's a ton of stuff I dislike about the Obama version of government but I also know where the real damage to the nation arose. He was hardly given a chance to screw things up!
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
this is sheer dribble... off to the soapbox with you. I find it amazing how you jump down peoples' throats for oversimplifying things then you do the same damn thing. I have no idea who you think hijacked the "Republican Party" but it sure as hell wasn't a bunch of Bible thumpers. That has got to be one of the most bigoted things I've ever seen uttered here.
Normally you make rational statements. No more cool-aid for you sir.
As for getting things done, if the car is going off the cliff in a mile or two, compromise is out of the question.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: That has got to be one of the most bigoted things I've ever seen uttered here.
No - the religious right (as they're called) took their toll on the GOP when they made their faith's anti-abortion stand a virtual litmus test for the party.
The other minority horror is the "Tea Party" who's elected representatives, as a voting block, have taken over their party and, by proxy, an attempt to take over much of the government. Or - more correctly, big money buys them their seats (Koch Brothers) and so the 'anti-insiders' are run by the biggest insiders of all.
As for the 'economy' car - those who sent it careening towards the cliff by their anti-regulatory stand, are busy pointing every which way with the blame - but it's the same pattern as the S&L disaster: no regulation and the thugs rape the economy (again).
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Again, the most selective facts from you. One example: the banking crisis was precipitated by the first Clinton who came up with the idea that if you gave loans to people who could not pay them back, it would help them. The crisis built throughout Clinton's 8 years. When Bush came in, he tried to stop what was going on with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to no avail - Chris Todd and Barney Frank blocked every single attempt to stop what was going on.
Saying it was Bush's fault - jeesh. Just keep digging.
As for your "religious right" blah, blah, blah, the same brush slings to your side as well.
Koch Brothers vs. Soros, and on it goes. Your blind with your bigotry.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: e first Clinton who came up with the idea that if you gave loans to people who could not pay them back, i
WRONG!
It was to make loans easier - but predatory loans were still illegal. That, of course, assumes that someone in government was watching. During the Shrub's tenure, money was piling in to the big banks and so nothing was done. Then they packaged them, sold the bundled junk to get more money to do it again: a pyramid scheme allowed by the anti-government-regulation crowd. Note, too, that the loans were made by local mortgage brokers (not Wall Street, but Main Street, despite the sloganism). They talked people into loans they should make and couldn't maintain. That was never part of any law.
Quote: Often, banks would offload this risk to insurance companies or other counterparties through credit default swaps, making their actual risk exposures extremely difficult for investors and creditors to discern.[35]
from Wikipedia lookup of Fannie May - scroll down to "Mortgage Chrisis from Late 2007"
Quote: It could have been prevented, except:
In the Wiki paragraph above that cited above, you'll notice how Bush opposed legislation that was designed to fix a problem:
Quote: "The regulatory regime envisioned by H.R. 1461 is considerably weaker than that which governs other large, complex financial institutions."
a problem, in his anti-regulatory mindset, should not be fixed.
We paid the price. Wall Street and Main Street brokers kept the money.
As for my gripe with the religious right? I don't follow their faith and I'd consider using some second amendment rights to protect my first amendment rights. Remember the hell they created with prohibition of alcohol? They're just an American version of the Taliban.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
DoD answers to Congress (or at least it should).
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
United States Department of Defense - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[^]
If we can trust Wikipedia... the DOD is an executive branch department controlled directly by the Secretary of Defense (an appointed cabinet level position) who answers directly to the president.
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. ~ Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
But only congress can declare war and allocate money for defense, so ultimately, the DoD answers to congress.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Surely any company that bits for a contract would expect to recruit staff if required after they win the contract, not have it all in place for the bid unless it can be absorbed by current staffing levels?
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, but our MoD wouldn't accept an offer from an "economically disadvantaged" company. They require documentation of longevity/tenure, proof of assets, and evidence that sufficient resources can be applied to the contract.
It's the MoD, not the guy down the road who runs the post office and needs a spreadsheet app. You have to prove that you can deliver and that you'll still be around to fix it, n years down the line.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
